Which Contax T you have and recommend?

I've owned briefly the Contax T original and the Contax T2. Honestly I didn't click with either. The original T has the barn door lens cap which makes it much less usable for shooting quickly than it should be and more awkward to carry around open and ready to use. It is super quiet however the film canister shakes a little in the camera which gives it a not so high quality feel.

I found that the T2 consistently focused further away than I wanted it to, even using the ingenious manual focusing thing. I was very frustrated with the way the backgrounds in all my pics were sharper than the thing I wanted to focus on.

I've seen this in other T2 pics as well in galleries here and other places. There's something odd with the focusing or something.

In the end they both went back to where they came and I use a Yashica T4 when I need a compact P & S with a good lens. It's cheaper, lighter, water resistant and i find manual controls on a super small P & S pretty over rated anyway. The T4 doesn't always nail focus but it renders really nice out of focus areas when it does and leads my eye to the thing I wanted to photograph more consistently.
 
I've got the Contax T, but I've never used the T2 etc.

On the T the film canister does give a little rattle but not much. The zeiss lens is ace. The small size is ace and with no motor wind and autofocus it is super-super quiet.

I beleive the T2 onwards can suffer from a little vignetting wide open when the T does not.
 
I had a (black) T3 for a few years. I loved it for the size.

I cannot recall any image problems with it at all.

If I could find one at a reasonable price, I'd probably buy it again.
 
I've owned two T2's and a T3 and a Nikon 35 Ti (briefly) in the past and without a doubt, the T3 takes the best pictures of any compact I've ever used. Image quality is unsurpassed by any competator. It's close focusing down to about 14" is a big plus. Controls are a little finicky and in this respect the T2 easily wins, but you'll get more keepers with the T3. If size is not an issue, consider the Contax G1 or preferably a G2 with a 45/2 Planar. It's the only thing that beats the T3 for speed and imaging.
 
The original Contax T may be my favorite camera. Its stellar lens, truly pocketable
size and limited automation make it among the most desirable 35mm cameras.

Chris
 
I've two T2's, love them. Lens is top notch, usability very good. Tvs 1 has the easier handling, but a less good lens.
 
I cannot speak of them all but I do own a T2 and regard it as a great upper level point and shoot. Its lens produces simply superb negatives and prints. As a long time Leica user I can say the T2 is as good as or better. Those Carl Zeiss lenses certainly have something going for them.

And it has nice handling. I have read that the T3 lens is marginally sharper but from what I have seen the T2 handles better - it has a conventional (well what was conventional in the manual focus days) aperture ring on the lens and a dial for other functions. No tapping buttons to access a menu then intolerably long scrolling thru menus to get the function you want - as so many cameras do. It is also a little bigger than the T3 and so is more able to be handled effectively. (Of course it loses a little in pocketability.)

The AF works well and there is an infinity setting to ensure sharp shots thru windows and other ambiguous occasions where AF might get it wrong. You can also manually focus using the dial. It also allows you to set your exposure compensation by twisting a little dial.

I still have mine but am not using it much due to the temptation to use digital when I am not using my Leica M. But I am loathe to sell it as I know I will never get what it is worth in todays market and I will in any event regret it if I do. If I had the choice between the T, the T2 and T3. Well I never liked the drop down barn door on the T. As between the other two it would be a toss up. I like the T3s pocketability and reprots of its even better lens but do not like what I hear about its usability.

All in all a fine camera.
 
Last edited:
I loved my T2 and the image quality was superb. However, I think its a little bulky for "pocket size".
 
fbf said:
I loved my T2 and the image quality was superb. However, I think its a little bulky for "pocket size".
Click to expand...

The T without flash is quite small and pocketable.


nightfly said:
I use a Yashica T4 when I need a compact P & S with a good lens. It's cheaper, lighter...
Click to expand...

But too big to fit in my pocket.



Chris
 
Last edited:
I have a T2 that I have used quite a lot since I bought it last year. The lens is awesome. The autoexposure is accurate. The camera is highly practical for use. The overall built quality is first class.
 
I second what awilder had said. I also own both T2 and T3. T2 is an excellent camera, but T3 is simply a better camera, no question about that!

1. Image quality: T3 is sharper, more contrasty, and less vignette than T2. You see the differences even on 4X6 prints. You will see a bigger difference if you shoot slides.

2. Built: T3 is smaller, but has a more solid feeling, especially when the lens is out.

3. Convenience: T3 focuses closer (0.4m vs. 0.7m, a huge difference!), can leave the film tip out (a real plus!), can attach a filter (with an adapter), and can stay fixed at the largest f2.8 for sure (T2 can't).

4. You can still manually control the apertures on T3 when using the flash, as long as it is within the flash range. You can't do that on T2.

5. There are occasional focus problems on T2 when aiming at closer object (under 1.0m to its closest 0.7m). T3 is rarely a problem, even down to 0.4 or 0.5m.

6. The only better things on T2 are easier-operating aperture ring on the lens, and a bigger viewfinder.
 
I loved my T2 as well, too bad its being sold..

Just out of curiosity for T3 owners, with the T2 you can't use f2.8 manually as selecting that turns on AP mode. Does the T3 have a similar issue for its smallest aperture?
 
Both the T2 and T3 can be used in the aperture priority mode at f/2.8 but once the light reaches a certain brightness requiring 1/200 shutter speed, the T2 automatically shifts from aperture priority at f/2.8 to program mode. The smaller stops on the T2 can be used but if the light is too bright, you must stop down further if warned by the camera or risk over-exposure. The T3 can be left in aperture priority at f/2.8 even in brighter light due to the higher top speed thanks to it's double shutter design.
 
I've not noticed a lot of vignetting with my T2's. Some for sure, but not terrible by any means. I'm not shooting much slide film with it however.
 
lol, talking about t3 is better build than t2? more solid feeling? i cannot agree with that. The t3 does have a better lens than t2, but i cannot see the difference in image quality. I will choose t2 over t3 w/o hesitation. Simply because the t2 is cheap and better build. I didn't notice much vignetting with my T2
 
Monte920 said:
I second what awilder had said. I also own both T2 and T3. T2 is an excellent camera, but T3 is simply a better camera, no question about that!

1. Image quality: T3 is sharper, more contrasty, and less vignette than T2. You see the differences even on 4X6 prints. You will see a bigger difference if you shoot slides.

2. Built: T3 is smaller, but has a more solid feeling, especially when the lens is out.

3. Convenience: T3 focuses closer (0.4m vs. 0.7m, a huge difference!), can leave the film tip out (a real plus!), can attach a filter (with an adapter), and can stay fixed at the largest f2.8 for sure (T2 can't).

4. You can still manually control the apertures on T3 when using the flash, as long as it is within the flash range. You can't do that on T2.

5. There are occasional focus problems on T2 when aiming at closer object (under 1.0m to its closest 0.7m). T3 is rarely a problem, even down to 0.4 or 0.5m.

6. The only better things on T2 are easier-operating aperture ring on the lens, and a bigger viewfinder.
Click to expand...


Can you find a mint T3 for $185? ==> No
Can you find a mint T2 for $185? ==> Yes

Is the T3 worth the difference in cost?
 
conradyiu said:
Which Contax T you have and recommend ? (in terms of image quality)
Click to expand...
I have the T3 (Sonnar 35/2.8) and original T (same Sonnar 38/2.8 used in the T2). In terms of image quality, the T3 is better in matters of contrast, sharpness and color saturation. In fact, the S35 is one hell of a lens if you want ultramodern rendition. S35 and S38 vignetting is about equal, with little improvement stopping down. The older S38, however, is extremely attractive on its own terms, and produces a negative with better tonality. In summary, get both!

Cheaper alternative to the S35 is the Zeiss Vario-Tessar of the Yashica T4 Zoom. Rendition is ultramodern, too, with remarkable sharpness. The camera itself (from Kyocera) is very friendly and effective.
 
Last edited:
raid said:
Can you find a mint T3 for $185? ==> No
Can you find a mint T2 for $185? ==> Yes

Is the T3 worth the difference in cost?
Click to expand...

I was only talking about the quality and functionality here, not the C/P value. Otherwise, how do you justify the much higher cost of Leica M6 or M7 compared to Contax G2?

Your estimation cost of T2 seems too low. You either have to find a great friend who is willing to sell you $185 for a T2, or a T2 in "bargain" condition. Nowadays it should cost between mid $200 to low $300. A 60th Anniversary Gold Edition will cost much higher.

As for T3, I agree that the recent prices on eBay are simply too outrageous! But it does reflect one fact that T3 is much more desirable by buyers than T2. I personally have owned one T2 and two T3s. I had my T2 for several years and always had the similar opinion like yours: " Is the T3 worth the difference in cost?" That was why I never bought a T3 until a few months ago, I picked up a mint conditioned T3, with all original accesories, box, and papers, for about $450 in Taiwan. That had changed my viewpoint ever since. T3 is more worth than $450 that I spent! I later had another opportunity for a similar conditioned T3 with similar price, and I bought it immediately without any hesitation! I enjoyed using them so much! However, I will probably still keep my T2. Their color productions are somewhat different. Both are very attractive, though T3 is definitely sharper!
 
Last edited:
Having had the Contax T, T2 and T3, I found the original T to be the best: shortest shutter lag, best controls, best viewfinder, quiet, best battery life.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom